Thoughts from the Inner Mind

Menu

On Sotomayor: The First Wave

This isn’t what I had planned for today, but it just had to be done.

This past Tuesday morning President Obama publically nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor for a position on the highest court in the land. Since then, the political pundits on both sides have set the stage for the battle that could be.

Personally, Rush’s quick negative decree acts more as an endorsement. Newt chimes in, and then I get a phone call from a pro-life activist group. As many conservatives proclaim the appointment of an activist judge as act of the Devil, yet their acts of seeking to overturn Roe v. Wade isn’t activism? Sorry RNC, I don’t buy into your code word.

Whether our senators reinforce why the public has low respect for politicians and why Congress has a low approval rating is yet to be seen, Judge Sotomayor should be vetted and not rubberstamped – but not as a political football.

As part of his segment, CNN’s Jack Cafferty asked a question about the effect of quick-to-react critics as Gingrich and Limbaugh on the GOP. Reading the comments from people is interesting.

Although not solely about the recent nomination, Kelly at the Eclectic Quill has an outstanding post about the Christian Right, a group that has hijacked the Republican Party to fund and promote its agenda.

Post navigation

11 thoughts on “On Sotomayor: The First Wave”

I’m not big on politics, but it seems like President Obama has sports on the brain too mcuh. First he weighs in on BCS, then he does a publicized NCAA bracket, now he nominates a judge with two high-profile sports decisions. I love sports as much as the next guy or gal, but I’d personally prefer the President to focus on more pressing needs.

I love the honesty in regards of the codeword phrase. I’ve alluded to this nomination in my pass two post, but go head on in an upcoming post.

Rush, Newt & Cheney, the voice of the New R.N.C. don’t realize what they’re accomplishing for the Democrats. I instruct Democrats to remain quiet and let the Republicans do this one for you. Once they have handed you another growing demographic, do the right thing and thank them for making your job easier.

I’m simply waiting for Cheney to seal the deal.

They’ve basically alienated the Black community, they’re doing a good job pushing Women away, the gay/lesbian community has basically walked away and now the Hispanic community. WOW, who’s next?

GOP, take it from a minority, being the minority in the room isn’t always fun isn’t it. :)

Tim,
Good advice to the Dems, however 2 buts on this one. 1) It seems the left is also “on edge” about the nominee … and 2) since when have politicians ever been able to keep their mouth shut and just do their job!

The GOP tactic at the present time is a bit bizarre. Well, actually no party tactic, but more of the sign of the power and identity struggle it current has. Of course the fail to take my advise …. lay low, keep your mouth shut, choose your battles, and let the Dems shoot themselves in the foot.

– I wholeheartedly disagree with some of the statements she has made regarding her judicial philosophy. She has said that impartiality as a judge is unattainable, and basically overrated as a goal. I couldn’t disagree more; impartiality (“blind” justice) should be THE ONLY goal of judges. Bringing in one’s personal prejudices (and even embracing them) as a Latina, as a woman, as a whatever, is directly contrary to the goal of serving justice. If judges are to act on a whim, considering the “real-world consequences” of their rulings, and rule in favor of whatever side they “empathize” with more, we will basically have nothing more than hundreds of Federal judges deciding “what they think is right.” Somebody needs to re-read the U.S. constitution, because her comments are in blatant disregard of that document.
– I also wholeheartedly disagree that “overturning Roe V. Wade” would amount to judicial activism. To the contrary, Roe V Wade in and of itself was the most blatant act of judicial activism this country has ever seen. A handful of unelected jurists decided for the country not only that abortion would be legal, but that a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to abortion somehow exists in the US Constitution. Maybe the S.C. justices fantasized about such a right being mentioned in the Constitution, but read it a thousand times and you won’t find it. These justices, overturning laws in 30+ states against abortion, ruled that for 200 years, Constitutional scholars had somehow skipped that mysterious passage proclaiming abortion a right. So for 200 years, women’s Constitutional right to an abortion apparently was violated. Who knew?

Chef,
We can respectfully agree to disagree on most counts. I image every justice has been shaped in some way by their life experiences. I recently heard a similar phrase from Justice Alito, but the conservatives didn’t complain then. As Ed Rollins stated, just because one may disagree with her doesn’t make her unqualified.

Regarding Roe, I continue my long-standing lines … whether through the courts or legislation, morality can’t be mandated .. and the only reason to overturn Roe is so it can be overturned sometime in the future … and the beat goes on. Like it or not, it’s the law, and seeking to overturn is activism.

I haven’t read up her yet…So I haven’t formed an opinion on her…But I’ve heard the Right, Republicans, Conservatives, whatever you wish to use…attacking her, which in my opinion really makes them look bad…

You have a conservatives calling her racist…at the same time Glen Beck is having a make-believe conversation, refering to her as “hey hispanic chick” WTF!

I may be wrong…But I thought she on Bush’s short list of nominees…Which if that is true, then her attackers and those attacking the President, look pretty stupid.

I will do some research on her this weekend…Then maybe I’ll have some better thoughts.

BEEZE,
The attacks started the day of her nomination, and have continued since. IMHO, it’s more the conservative media instead of the politicians, but the latter isn’t totally innocent; however, at least they measure their responses. Again, I point to the Ed Rollins post.

She doesn’t have my blind support, nor am I blindly against her, thus I too want to know more about her. Knowledge about her should come forth through the natural vetting process.

Interesting point about her possibly being on Bush’s short list … both of us hedge on that. However, GHW Bush nominated her to her first to her first post on the federal bench.

I’m inclined more and more to believe that timvalantine is correct. The best way to win an argument with a right wing wind bag is to just let them keep talking. Eventually they something so over the top stupid that it exposes what they really believe. Obama has learned this. Watch him. He lets the blowhards blow hard for a few days, then weighs in.

In pretty much every way possible he’s been clobbering the Republicans since about October of last year.